If it had not already been apparent, the net effect of the DNC email hack has been to kick open the door to a deep Pindosi antagonism towards Putin. In what has become an old fashioned Pindosi pile-on, Obama, Clinton, the Democrat Party and what seems the entire political establishment as well as the MSM, have united to undermine Putin as if to prime the Pindo sheeple for war with Russia. War is, after all, more successful when the people have been thoroughly programmed. For instance, for a war-weary Pindosi public ‘we are bombing civilians out of a humanitarian necessity’ may work well. If necessary, a little hysteria wouldn’t hurt but most of all, a necessary requirement is to efficiently tutor the public consciousness to despise the adversary. In this case, Clinton has identified Putin as the adversary and that he is one evil reincarnation of Adolf Hitler. Among media outlets, Politico, once considered a ‘liberal’ magazine ran “Inside’s Putin’s Information War” whose author has found a lucrative book deal on the subject and yes, this is the same Politico that requested DNC permission to publish re the Sanders/Clinton primary. The Times of London joined the effort to demonize Putin with several anti Russian articles over the weekend including “Putin’s Information War” which ran on Jul 30 followed by “Inside Putin’s Info War on Pindostan’ in the WSJ on Jul 31. Keep your eyes peeled as the “Putin Info War” concept is sure to catch on. As part of the effort to synchronize public antipathy to an appropriately belligerent level, AP recently published an article for wide distribution entitled “Clinton v Putin: Russian television shows what Kremlin thinks of her.” Perhaps AP presumed to rouse the Pindo sheeple in defense of Hillary Clinton. The first paragraph began with the admission that Clinton’s entire acceptance speech had been broadcast live on nationwide television in Russia. If anyone yearns for the day when a Putin speech will be broadcast across Pindo TV, forget about it. A good guess is that the intellectually lazy Pindo sheeple, including many liberals who have forgotten how to think, would not make the effort to inform themselves of world events. Thereafter, the AP article followed with a series of assertions that dazzled the reader with its irony, such as:

Viewers were told that Clinton sees Russia as an enemy and cannot be trusted. The Democrat convention was portrayed as proof that Pindosi democracy is a sham. Channel One introduced Clinton as “a politician who puts herself above the law, who is ready to win at any cost and who is ready to change her principles depending on the political situation.”

If the AP reporter wrote with the intention that the Pindo sheeple would rise up en masse and demand satisfaction, shrieking how unfair of those Russkies to write like that about our Gal Hill, that reporter was dead wrong. What the reporter did not mention was that a significant number of Pindosis, including some of those who plan to hold their collective noses while voting for Clinton in sheer terror of Trump, agree with those quotes. What the reporter did not mention was that the Sanders and Trump campaigns have been largely based on those sentiments giving Clinton an unexpected run for the money, which explains why she has had to pull out all the stops to beat Trump, a candidate who should by any standard have been a piece of cake. Giving a wink and a nod to the MSM, Clinton formalized her accusations on Sunday Fox News that ‘Russian intelligence” was responsible for the DNC hacking and linked her opponent Donald Trump to Vladimir Putin. Using the DNC hack issue as an opportunity to further hammer on Putin, Clinton asserted during the Fox interview:

We KNOW that Russian intelligence services hacked into the DNC and we KNOW that they arranged for a lot of those emails to be released and we KNOW that Donald Trump has shown a very troubling willingness to back up Putin, to support Putin.

A good follow-up by an engaged journalist might have been what does Clinton know, how does she know it and when did she know it? If the proof exists, why the reluctance to provide specifics to the Pindosi sheple, though that might require initiative, transparency and some candour? While challenging Trump on his commitment to the Constitution, wasn’t Clinton trained as an attorney to understand that evidence comes before the accusation? This is not the first time that Clinton has personally attacked Putin. In Mar 2014 before a University of California audience, she said he was “thin-skinned,” was trying to “re-sovietize Europe while threatening instability and the peace of Europe.” In citing ‘Russian aggression,” she is smart enough to know the difference between protecting ethnic Russians who have centuries of deep cultural roots in Ukraine and Crimea as compared to Hitler’s invasions of eastern Europe. An impartial observer can only assume Clinton has knowingly skewed the chronology of events in the Ukraine which began with the Pindosi-initiated overthrow of a democratically-elected President on Feb 22 2014, followed by an overwhelming vote on Mar 16 by Crimean citizens to reunite with Russia which was then followed by the legal annexation of the Crimean peninsula to Russia on Mar 18. What is so difficult to understand? Thanks to Clinton’s repetitive disinformation campaign, accusations of ‘Russian aggression’ are now widespread, repeated without regard to the evidence throughout the mainstream media and by Congress critturs, many of whom choose to remain uninformed. Back to the Fox interview, she could not resist adding, with mock indignation:

I think laying out the facts raises serious issues about Russian interference in our elections, in our democracy.

And as if the rest of us were asleep at the wheel and could not distinguish fact from fiction, she further added:

For Trump to both encourage that and to praise Putin despite what appears to be a deliberate effort to try to affect the election I think raises national security issues.

Does she not see that ‘interference in our elections, in our democracy’ is exactly what the DNC did to the Bernie Sanders campaign? And has no bright-eyed eager-beaver staff person yet pointed out to Clinton that if Russia and Putin had been intent on disrupting the Pindosi presidential election, why wouldn’t they have gone after Clinton’s ‘classified’ State Dept emails on her personal server, which were subject to an FBI investigation carrying the potential of criminal charges? Then again, an educated assumption might be that Russian intelligence does have those emails in their possession. Now there’s a real national security issue. In her eagerness to further aggravate Pindo-Russian relations, apparently Clinton is not only unfamiliar with the State Dept’s Foreign Service Protocol for the Modern Diplomat guidelines for rules and process of diplomatic protocol (or perhaps it does not apply to her), but appears she did not receive the memo from DNI Clapper. Responding to the DNC-Russian furor in a more blasé and introspective manner than might be expected, Clapper stepped in as a calm voice of reason stating that he was ‘somewhat taken aback by the hyper-ventilation on this” and that the US was in “reactionary mode” regarding cyber-attacks. Interestingly, Clapper commented:

I don’t think we are quite ready yet to make a call on attribution… Cyber warfare is not terribly different than what went on during the Cold War, just a different modality. The Pindo sheeple need to accept and become more resilient, since cyber threats are a major long-term challenge. Pindosis should not be quite so excitable when we have yet another instance.

Hmm… wonder to whom he was referring. In other words, we spy on them, they spy on us, all’s fair in love and war and that there is a certain level of honor among (cyber) thieves.

Renee Parsons has been a member of the ACLU’s Florida State Board of Directors and president of the ACLU Treasure Coast Chapter. She has been an elected public official in Colorado, an environmental lobbyist and staff member of the US House of Representatives in Washington DC.

The beginning of the operation to liberate Aleppo seem to have caught the Obama administration by surprise, just like at the time, and the emergence of the Russian military in Syria, writes the WaPo. But despite the fact that Russia every time ignores all the warnings of Sec State Jackass Kerry, the latter chose the language of persuasion and concessions and not decisive action, says the author. Jackass has been convincing Moscow for more than a month to agree to the “very best” deal on Syria, but it’s not like the Russian side has taken the negotiations seriously, writes the WaPo. Pindostan agrees to give a positive response to “long-standing request of Russia to conduct joint military operations “against those Syrian rebels who are considered terrorists,” and in return the Kremlin will again promise to convince the Syrian government to stop bombing some areas of Syria. This is so serious a concession to Putin that even some high-priced boxtops from the Obama administration do not hide their doubts about such a deal, the paper reported. In particular, DNI Clapper in an interview with the WaPo expressed doubt that Moscow will fulfil its promises regarding Syria. In practice, Putin has “other passions” and instead of being satisfied with a “partial victory,” Jackass suggested Russia in conjunction with the Syrian army engaged in a new military campaign, trying to”squeeze” the anti-government forces from Aleppo. And if they manage to bring the operation to a successful conclusion, it “would actually mean winning the war.” Last week, Moscow unilaterally announced the opening of four humanitarian corridors for the evacuation of residents from the rebel-held areas of the city, the article says:

The Russians are given to understand that the rest will be mercilessly destroyed. Cutting three weeks ago, the last road leading to rebel-controlled district, regime troops systematically shelled the remaining hospitals and other medical institutions.

And even representatives of the State Dept “was forced to admit that the Russian operation, which the Kremlin cynically called humanitarian mission is nothing like the power requirement to the opposition of unconditional surrender,” writes the WaPo. Moscow and Damascus openly ignore “the ongoing political process under the auspices of the UN and violate the UNSCR, as Syrian rebels started a major offensive, trying to break the blockade of Aleppo. As a result, in Monday, when is the deadline for the conclusion of an agreement on “political transition in Syria,” established by UNGAR 2254, the country continues hard fighting. The paper says:

It seems that Putin has once again stunned the Obama administration, as it was in September, when Russia sent to Syria its troops.

Jackass Kerry admitted that he just last week called to Moscow and “requested clarification” about the actions in Aleppo, which, according to him “by military cunning, creating the risk of a complete collapse of cooperation,” but by Monday have not received answers to their questions. Jackass said:

The currently available information is very disturbing. It is very important to determine whether Russia and the Assad regime to act according to UNSCR.

Jackass “again and again insists that Russia should give up,” otherwise it will face “serious consequences,” including the “Pindo Plan B on Syria,” but unfortunately, Moscow has no reason to respond to his warnings. According to the authors, Pindostan should not trust Putin in Syria. Russia stubbornly continues to ignore pressure from the Pindo side, and Jackass every time meets only new calls for cooperation and new concessions, instead finally force Russia to feel all “effects” he has repeatedly warned. In the beginning of this week, Jackass once again promised:

Within a few hours or days we will see whether we can change this dynamic in relations with Russia.

Search

Search for:

rowan dot berkeley at gmail dot com

Tishby Torat ha-Ra

I intend to complete the hebrew textfile for the whole book and unify it, so that it will be available as one big file to hebrew-reading students on a permanent basis, or as long as the blog lasts, which will ensure its survival and distribution.